Continuing with the comments previously mentioned in the
last post, the first sixty-three comments were answered in the previous 18
posts, the sixty-fourth and additional comments are answered beginning below:
Comment #64 “I love your work and information. I ran across this recently and
thought you might appreciate it since it is what you have often said: ‘World Location First Errors—there (are many) articles and books that focus on a
specific place in the world first, before analyzing the entire geography
available in the Book of Mormon. They typically use a few place names and
features from the Book of Mormon to provide a cursory fit to some place in the
world. The rest of the Book of Mormon geography is then based on the
geography of the part of the world that was selected. The error with this
approach is that if the first few places are not placed in the right world
location, the rest of the map ends up not making any sense. The map may
become skewed or it becomes impossible to add all of the places. The
author then usually contradicts himself or herself trying to explain why some
things don’t fit or just leaves places out of their description when they don’t
fit.” Pearl W.
Response: Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Thanks.
Comment
#65 “I find the parallels in phraseology
of the Book of Mormon suggests a single author, not the many claimed to have
written it.” Mona P.
The Prophet Mormon abridged the entire
record except for the initial writings of Nephi and Jacob and the small portion
prior to the Words of Mormon
Response:
You are right with your first point. Mormon abridged the entire record—it is
his writing we are reading; and Joseph Smith translated the entire record and
it is his 1820s New England English language we are reading. Either way you
look at it, the phraseology of the Book of Mormon is going to suggest a single
author.
Comment #66 “I believe in the
Great Lakes/American Heartland model for the Land of Promise. Like others, I
think that the statements Joseph Smith made were based on his knowing the
location of the Book of Mormon. After all, looking at Joseph Smith's
statements, he either knew or he didn't know. If he knew, he knew by
revelation. And if he didn't know, you've got to ask yourself why he said the
things that he said. It seems to me that if you don't agree with this line of
reasoning, by implication, you think that Joseph lied.” Franklyn.
Response:
At no time did Joseph Smith speak as a prophet uttering revelation regarding
the location of the Book of Mormon. He had his own ideas, like many of us, and
was free, like we are, to state them. We have posted here before Joseph’s own
words about the fact that he did not always speak by revelation. He was, after
all, an individual with his own mind and his own feelings and beliefs. When he
spoke for the Church, he was speaking as a Prophet. However, the Church has
never stated officially, nor has any of its leaders, where the Book of Mormon
lands were located, other than in the Western Hemisphere. That many early
leaders had strong feelings about it is obvious and understandable—just like
many good LDS people do today. The fact that you believe in the Great Lakes or
Heartland areas is your personal prerogative, and you are certainly entitled to
that. I might suggest that you compare all the geographical comments described
by Mormon and others in the scriptural record against that belief. The Book of
Mormon, after all, is the first, second, and final word on the matter until the
Church officially states a location.
Comment #67 “Why is there so much
controversy and contention about the geographical locations of the Book of
Mormon. Does it really matter where the Land of Promise was located?”
Response: First of all, there should be no contention regarding the Book
of Mormon. Contention is fostered by the Adversary. Controversy, on the other
hand, comes when people have and state their beliefs, opinions, and feelings on
a matter and that, I suppose, is to be expected. However, what really matters
about the Book of Mormon is the doctrines found therein. It is, after all, a
Second Witness of Jesus Christ, and as such, a companion work to the Bible.
Having said that, I also believe that when we determine a location for the Book
of Mormon lands, we can better appreciate and even more understand the writing
within it. Since I have spent the past nearly 25 years on this subject, the
geographical understanding of the Land of Promise has added to my testimony and
knowledge of the Book of Mormon and all that is within its pages, just as has
knowledge of the Holy Land assisted millions to a testimony of the Bible. While
a geographical location is not essential to help understand, appreciate, and
gain a testimony of the Book of Mormon, I have found it most helpful and
beneficial.
Comment #68 “I
find the Rapid Change in Lamanite Skin Color
listed in the Book of Mormon hard to accept. How could skin color change so
rapidly.” Trayson.
Response: Like in the times of Cain, the Lord
cursed Laban and Lemuel and those with them who were opposed to the Lord and
his plan, and placed a mark upon them. For the Deity who has created worlds
without number, all the heavens, galaxies, supergalaxies, etc., etc., etc.,
anything and everything is possible. For the God who created DNA, to change its
markers and the resultant effects, such as skin coloring, physical appearance,
etc., is well within reason. Personally, I refrain from limiting what the Lord
can do.
Comment #69 “The Book of Mormon
contains some thousand years of history with numerous geographical locations
stated, but nothing definitive. Can any of us imagine a Bible minus any
definitive geography?” Daryl.
Response: A rather comical comment. When the early French
and English knights, as well as numerous peasants, started off for the Crusades
in the 11th century A.D., they had little knowledge about the
Levant, and almost no idea where Jerusalem was exactly located. None had ever
been there. They knew only that they were headed for the Eastern Mediterranean
littoral, and the Holy Land beyond, but couldn’t have told you where Bethlehem
was, how far from Jerusalem it was located, or where Jericho was located, or the
Dead Sea—in fact, they knew nothing “definitively” about any of the Holy Land,
nor about the Turkish Anatolia where Pope Urban II had called the western
volunteers to help the Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos repel the invading
Seljuq Turks. Had they not have had mariners and other guides taking them
there, they might not have even found their destinations. They went to win back
the Levant and the Holy Land from Muslim control, but were not at all
conversant as to specific geographical locations and areas. In a word, they had
no idea of the definitive geography of the biblical locations. How interesting people think what is known
today was always known. For centuries, as an example, the City of Troy (Troia),
mentioned in both Homer’s Iliad and
the Odyssey, written in the eighth
century B.C., as well as briefly in Virgil’s Aeneid, and in the Sack of Troy (Ilioupersis) the
ninth epic of the Epic Cycle,
attributed to Arctinus of Miletu, was all considered a fictional account for centuries. No one
had ever found the city or believed in its actual existence. However, the
ancient city was discovered by Charles McLaren
in 1822 and then excavated by Heinrich Schliemann from 1870 to 1890. The
Homeric city was found within what they called the
“layers of ruins” in the citadel at Hisarlık which are now numbered Troy
I through Troy IX, with various subdivisions. It is located in northwest Anatolia in what is now Turkey, south of the southwest end of the Dardanelles-Hellespont and northwest of Mount Ida,
in an area anciently called Troas. Today, the City of Troy is “definitive”;
however, for some twenty-five hundred years, it wasn’t even believed to have
been real.
Left: Part of the remaining Walls of Ancient Troy located on the Biga
Peninsula, anciently called Troad or Troas in the northwestern part of
Anatolia, Turkey; Right: The fabled Trojan Horse of the Iliad
(See
the next post, “Answering Recent Comments – Part XX,” for more comments made
about different posts on this website)
No comments:
Post a Comment